Re: Simple (?) fix for _call and _str

Lenard Lindstrom wrote:

> There is no need to have a special isProto flag to tell str_ what to
> print. In Python classes have names. The Python class statement passes
> the class name to the class factory function. If Prothon's object or
> class statement did the same the name could be saved to a name_
> attribute of the prototype object. If str_ finds a name_ attribute in
> an object's dictionary it displays the object as a prototype,
> otherwise as an instance.

That is what I have been saying.  The name can act as the flag.

Your suggestion would need some special syntax to tell the parser it is a
prototype.  I don't want to use "object" because it can be used for
prototypes or objects and I don't want to use "class" because this "fix" is
less than class.  I guess we could add a keyword "proto", but I personally
would prefer the decorator approach with typeName_ = "name" or maybe even
just name_ = "name".  I think a keyword just to assign a name would be
overkill.

> My solution to call_ was to not adopt Python's instancd creation by
> class call aproach. Use a new() function or method instead.

Once you fix str_ with the name_ attribute you might as well use the same
fix for call_.